If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

"Finally, the most important thing to keep in mind is that we only display the median expected outcome. So a player with a .350 projected wOBA is equally likely to hit better than .350 and worse than .350. The system might say the player has a 25% chance to hit above .375, for example, but that’s hard to communicate."

So, with that in mind. If we have 9 young top prospects with a median expected outcome between 1-2 WAR, how likely do you think it is that just one player from that nine deviates to a much better outcome? Similarly, how likely is it that one player deviates to a much worse outcome? Its basically inevitable that both will happen. The fact that we have nine separate chances to find an outcome that deviates in a positive direction is wonderful for us. That is why the Price is Right Plinko comment was made in the ZiPs article that was posted.

"Finally, the most important thing to keep in mind is that we only display the median expected outcome. So a player with a .350 projected wOBA is equally likely to hit better than .350 and worse than .350. The system might say the player has a 25% chance to hit above .375, for example, but that’s hard to communicate."

So, with that in mind. If we have 9 young top prospects with a median expected outcome between 1-2 WAR, how likely do you think it is that just one player from that nine deviates to a much better outcome? Similarly, how likely is it that one player deviates to a much worse outcome? Its basically inevitable that both will happen. The fact that we have nine separate chances to find an outcome that deviates in a positive direction is wonderful for us. That is why the Price is Right Plinko comment was made in the ZiPs article that was posted.

"Finally, the most important thing to keep in mind is that we only display the median expected outcome. So a player with a .350 projected wOBA is equally likely to hit better than .350 and worse than .350. The system might say the player has a 25% chance to hit above .375, for example, but that’s hard to communicate."

So, with that in mind. If we have 9 young top prospects with a median expected outcome between 1-2 WAR, how likely do you think it is that just one player from that nine deviates to a much better outcome? Similarly, how likely is it that one player deviates to a much worse outcome? Its basically inevitable that both will happen. The fact that we have nine separate chances to find an outcome that deviates in a positive direction is wonderful for us. That is why the Price is Right Plinko comment was made in the ZiPs article that was posted.

WAR projections must make a guess on playing time because it is a counting stat. ZiPs projects 1.9 and 1.3 fWAR out of Soroka and Gohara because it only assigns them ~100 IP. If either produces at the expected rate over 150+ IP they will approximate 3 win pitchers.

This is why it's best to look at the projected ERA- (or +) values from these projections:

League average ERA- is defined as 100, so these projections show the Braves with 11 guys who are projected to approximate an MLB average pitcher if they were at the MLB level NOW, plus Julio who can be a back end innings eater until someone else pushes him out.

CrazyTrain is pretty dumb with zero reading comprehension skills, but that's exactly what "ZiPS actually projects the 11th-to-15th best starting pitchers in the organization (Max Fried, Joey Wentz, Wes Parsons, Ian Anderson, and Kyle Muller) to not be that far from league average" means.

Many of those guys won't be at the MLB level now, so it stands to reason they will get better.

Almost every single name on that list is young and a strong candidate to improve, which is far different than a list full of old declining pitchers.

The clear course of action is to let these guys continue to sort themselves out and allow the true impact SPs to reveal themselves.

Last edited by Enscheff; 12-06-2018 at 06:44 PM.

Gausman had a bad walk ratio for us -CrazyTrain 11/20/2018
BB/9 with Braves: 2.72

Fried, Newk and a couple other guys for Bumgarner and give him a pay day for 6ish years -CrazyTrain 10/15/18

I analyzed Teheran's motion. He will be a CYA candidate in 2018-2020, and will be an extension candidate. Do not trade him -GovClintonTyree 12/17/15

WAR projections must make a guess on playing time because it is a counting stat. ZiPs projects 1.9 and 1.3 fWAR out of Soroka and Gohara because it only assigns them ~100 IP. If either produces at the expected rate over 150+ IP they will approximate 3 win pitchers.

This is why it's best to look at the projected ERA- (or +) values from these projections:

League average ERA- is defined as 100, so these projections show the Braves with 11 guys who are projected to approximate an MLB average pitcher if they were at the MLB level NOW, plus Julio who can be a back and innings eater until someone else pushes him out.

Many of those guys won't be at the MLB level now, so it stands to reason they will get better.

Almost every single name on that list is young and a strong candidate to improve, which is far different than a list full of old declining pitchers.

The clear course of action is to let these guy continue to sort themselves out and allow the true impact SPs to reveal themselves.

I disagreed with the rebuild's strategy of acquiring as much pitching as possible, mostly because I didn't think we'd be as lucky as we have been with our position prospects. I didn't think that Albies, Acuna, and Camargo would have reached such heights 3 years ago, plus we've gotten great development from guys like Waters, Contreras, Pache, and Riley. We've been immensely lucky in that regard. That luck has set us up to have one of the most attractive lineups in baseball to go with the deepest core of young pitching talent since.... maybe ever in terms of pure depth.

Things could not have gone better for this organization and I'd hate to see us squander it by bailing out on the "process" too soon. I hope that AA sees this and doesn't spend an immense amount of resources to acquire highly volatile pitchers.

I disagreed with the rebuild's strategy of acquiring as much pitching as possible, mostly because I didn't think we'd be as lucky as we have been with our position prospects. I didn't think that Albies, Acuna, and Camargo would have reached such heights 3 years ago, plus we've gotten great development from guys like Waters, Contreras, Pache, and Riley. We've been immensely lucky in that regard. That luck has set us up to have one of the most attractive lineups in baseball to go with the deepest core of young pitching talent since.... maybe ever in terms of pure depth.

Things could not have gone better for this organization and I'd hate to see us squander it by bailing out on the "process" too soon. I hope that AA sees this and doesn't spend an immense amount of resources to acquire highly volatile pitchers.

Obviously not ideal, but kinda wonder if AA couldn't almost punt LF this season to hang onto everyone. Sign Gonzalez and split LF between Camargo/Gonzalez/Duvall/Riley in 2019 while finding out if Donaldson gets back to health. Would give you the Riley/Johan/Gonzalez tandem to take over at 3B if he doesn't, and you've got Ozuna, Castellanos, Puig, and Eaton as potential free-agent options next winter that he can use some of Donaldson/Julio/O'Day's money on.

Waters is intersting too. Would prefer a guy that projects to more power though. (2017 Draft Thread)

If they don't make additions they can expect the same 3-5 win improvement they saw last year. That makes the Braves a 75-78 win team. (What's the best we could hope for in 2018?)

Well that sucks. Wonder if he just went in low balling them. No reason for the DBacks to hang onto anybody at this point.

Don't imagine that he "lowballed" anybody by a huge amount - more likely offered something "fair" to stay in the game if neither team gets the type of overpay they're looking for. The same is likely true when he's talked to Brantley and McCutchen's representatives - some type of "hey, you're on our radar" type of offer that would provide extra flexibility for AA in case they were interested in signing early if last winter's market has them spooked.

Like nsacpi says - AA still has lots of options. That could very well change by Tuesday if people start coming off the board, but there's certainly no reason to jump out there and stretch to offer McCutchen or Brantley a fourth year with Haniger, Peralta, Pederson, Gonzalez, Matt Joyce, and even Markakis and Josh Harrison still floating around as potential options you could juggle things around a bit to add (as well as other trade options that might arise in the next 10 days or so).

Waters is intersting too. Would prefer a guy that projects to more power though. (2017 Draft Thread)

If they don't make additions they can expect the same 3-5 win improvement they saw last year. That makes the Braves a 75-78 win team. (What's the best we could hope for in 2018?)